Making a website for my portfolio?

Cloud9

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 10, 2005
229
0
between flesh and thought
So things are moving realy fast for me right now. Almost too fast. I need to take a serious look at getting a portfolio up on the web. I have only the slightest clue on how I would go about getting a website going-next to none really. Last time I did this was back in 98' and it was for a pbem rpg. I used frontpage and it was for a pc.

I dont have a lot of time to learn a complex web design program nor the money to spend on said program.

I noticed that lightroom has a feature that seems to allow you to post a gallery. I have some webspace, thats about to expire and couple of domains already that I may or may not use. I do know that I want to use a specific domain name, not a companies domain, like company/photos/cloud9.com

I've also looked at smugmug.com and there services seem pretty straightforward and to the point. But I dont know if I am getting ripped off for 150 a year.

Basicly I am going for a clean elegant site that acts as a portfolio for any freelance weddings, protrait, and musician shots i'll do as well as a give info about myself for any assisting that I may be able to get involved with to further my education and income.

Any ideas? I think if I cant think of something better I'll drop the money on smugmug just to get the darn thing going soon so I can get some business cards made with a site on it. But I am also gonna play around with light room and see if I use it to fake a website. I'd kind of like the site to play a slideshow of some of my work with a logo on the last pic at the end. That idea seems better in my mind then a page of thumbnail links...maybe one of you has done this?

Ok...Advice will be appreciated

Thanks
 

AvSRoCkCO1067

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2005
1,401
0
CO
Cloud9 said:
So things are moving realy fast for me right now. Almost too fast. I need to take a serious look at getting a portfolio up on the web. I have only the slightest clue on how I would go about getting a website going-next to none really. Last time I did this was back in 98' and it was for a pbem rpg. I used frontpage and it was for a pc.

I dont have a lot of time to learn a complex web design program nor the money to spend on said program.

I noticed that lightroom has a feature that seems to allow you to post a gallery. I have some webspace, thats about to expire and couple of domains already that I may or may not use. I do know that I want to use a specific domain name, not a companies domain, like company/photos/cloud9.com

I've also looked at smugmug.com and there services seem pretty straightforward and to the point. But I dont know if I am getting ripped off for 150 a year.

Basicly I am going for a clean elegant site that acts as a portfolio for any freelance weddings, protrait, and musician shots i'll do as well as a give info about myself for any assisting that I may be able to get involved with to further my education and income.

Any ideas? I think if I cant think of something better I'll drop the money on smugmug just to get the darn thing going soon so I can get some business cards made with a site on it. But I am also gonna play around with light room and see if I use it to fake a website. I'd kind of like the site to play a slideshow of some of my work with a logo on the last pic at the end. That idea seems better in my mind then a page of thumbnail links...maybe one of you has done this?

Ok...Advice will be appreciated

Thanks
Go iWeb. I'm running my entire portfolio on it, and it handles tons of pictures VERY well. It does help to have a .mac subscription, which you can find for VERY cheap on eBay.

Hope that helps.

Chris
 

Abstract

macrumors Penryn
Dec 27, 2002
24,414
124
Location Location Location
Well that's not even a huge problem. What IS a huge problem is that if you wanted to publish a blog, you're not allowed comments unless you have a .Mac subscription, which sucks.

I mean, if I posted a photo, I actually wouldn't mind getting comments right below it. Meh.
 

Abstract

macrumors Penryn
Dec 27, 2002
24,414
124
Location Location Location
Ok, well .Mac is slow, it's down often, and they only offer 1 GB of space, as far as I remember. If you want more space, you pay more.

If you use iWeb to create your site, you can't just "sync" it to your own website unless you have .Mac. This means resending your website every time you make a change. With a .Mac account, you only sync the changes to the site. Disabling all these things is just Apple's way to make you sign up for .Mac, but it's really not worth it for 1 GB of space. You're a pro, right? You'll need more than 1GB of space.
 

MacBoobsPro

macrumors 603
Jan 10, 2006
5,115
6
AvSRoCkCO1067 said:
Go iWeb. I'm running my entire portfolio on it, and it handles tons of pictures VERY well. It does help to have a .mac subscription, which you can find for VERY cheap on eBay.

Hope that helps.

Chris
My portfolio www.stuartluff.co.uk is done in iWeb without .mac and the comments (via email, not blog) I get are always very good.

I can use flash to a certain degree but iWeb is so easy and quick to use it just makes sense to do it in iweb.
 

Mike Teezie

macrumors 68020
Nov 20, 2002
2,205
1
Cloud9 said:
The last thing I want it to be is a blog. Its for professional use. Come and see, call if you like.
FWIW, just about every single pro photographer I admire has a blog they update very frequently.
 

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,610
408
Redondo Beach, California
AvSRoCkCO1067 said:
Go iWeb. I'm running my entire portfolio on it, and it handles tons of pictures VERY well. It does help to have a .mac subscription, which you can find for VERY cheap on eBay.

Hope that helps.

Chris
I tried iWeb to put some photos up. It was "way easy". I photographed the interior of a boarded up Motel. I wanted to put these on-line soon. My goal was "within a couple hours". I had never used iWeb but I tried it and met my goal with over an hour to spare. It was dead easy even for a first time iWeb user.

I dumped the image files from my Nikon D50 into iPhoto, make a quick edit pass (crop/adjust the selects and trash the junk) then fireup up iWeb and guessed my way around. When you save the site iWeb makes a folder. You simply put (ftp or drag and drop) this entire folder on a web server and you are done. writting the text to go with the images took the most time. And the resut looks nice too but you are limited to using Apple's templates.

No. I do not have a .mac account. I run an apache server on a computer at my house that connects to the Internet via a DSL line. Note that all Apple Macs ship with the Apache web server. You can self-host your own site if the traffic volume is very low. Most of us count our "hits" in visits per day, not hits per second so a DSL line will do fine. A 1.2 Ghz G4 Mac Mini or older notebook makes a great low volume server
 

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,610
408
Redondo Beach, California
stuartluff said:
I can use flash to a certain degree but iWeb is so easy and quick to use it just makes sense to do it in iweb.
The other advantage of iWeb over Flash is that your users will not have to hunt for the "Bypass Introduction" button so that can skip over the Flash junk.

Designers like Flash because of the control it gives them over exactly what the user sees. Users hate Flash for the same reason.
 

aricher

macrumors 68020
Feb 20, 2004
2,211
0
Chi-il
Abstract said:
Ok, well .Mac is slow, it's down often, and they only offer 1 GB of space, as far as I remember. If you want more space, you pay more.

If you use iWeb to create your site, you can't just "sync" it to your own website unless you have .Mac. This means resending your website every time you make a change. With a .Mac account, you only sync the changes to the site. Disabling all these things is just Apple's way to make you sign up for .Mac, but it's really not worth it for 1 GB of space. You're a pro, right? You'll need more than 1GB of space.
Ummm - you can buy more space for your .mac account if you need it. I have 2 GB of space. There's nothing flashy about my portfolio site - just plain and simple. iWeb is perfect for what I need it to do - no fuss no muss.
 

Abstract

macrumors Penryn
Dec 27, 2002
24,414
124
Location Location Location
You can. However, it's much cheaper just to get hosting elsewhere and uploading your site each time. Too bad you need to upload the whole thing, that's all.

And I think iWeb is fantastic, but cutting out functionality from it because I don't pay $140 Australian for .Mac isn't so nice. Paying $70 per year for a lot more space is, so that's why I'm not suggesting .Mac, although I'm sure it's a nice service. :)
 

pdxflint

macrumors 68020
Aug 25, 2006
2,407
14
Oregon coast
I don't have any experience with .mac from the site owners side of things, but I can say almost every .mac site I have visited was slow, slow, slow.... almost too slow to be usable. Mainly with the images, it seems. Not a thing I'd recommend for a photographer portfolio, unless they give it (.mac) some steroids.
 

epicwelshman

macrumors 6502a
Apr 6, 2006
810
0
Nassau, Bahamas
Mike Teezie said:
FWIW, just about every single pro photographer I admire has a blog they update very frequently.
While you make a good point, Photoblogs are often a seperate entity from a portfolio web site. I.e., John Doe may have johndoe.com as his professional site, but then either have johndoe.com/blog or johhnyphoto.com as his photoblog. In short, the OP wants a dedicated portfolio site, the blog would be secondary